About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
FBC 23
CNBC 20
CSPAN 18
CSPAN2 12
MSNBCW 11
CNNW 9
CNN 6
MSNBC 5
KQED (PBS) 4
KRCB (PBS) 4
KCSM (PBS) 2
KGO (ABC) 2
KQEH (PBS) 2
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 142
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 142 (some duplicates have been removed)
deficits for as far as the eye can see. washington has got a spending problem, not a revenue problem. if the president doesn't agree with our proposal, i believe he's got an obligation to families and small businesses to offer a plan of his own, a plan that can pass both chambers of the congress. we're ready and eager to talk to the president about such a plan. >> you did speak with the president earlier this week. can you characterize that call? did he have any kind of count offer and we understand that he is making clear that it's got to be increase rates for the wealthy or no deal. are you willing to give a little bit? >> the phone call was pleasant but was more of the same. the conversations that the staff had yesterday were more of the same. it's time for the president if he's serious to come back to was a count offer. >> the jobs record indicated unemployment is down roughly a full point from this time last year. [inaudible] [inaudible] why take such a risk when the job numbers are improving. >> because increasing tax rates will hit many small businesses that produce 60 to 70%
of the middle class -- catch up with my slides. there we go. the deficit and debt will improve as 34%. but the one thing they are certain is that taxes will increase. and in the next four years how it affected you think the federal government will be on each of the following issues. we read a list of these issues, we rotated those. this is how it basically stacks up. ensuring long-term future of entire programs such as social security and medicare, 65%. 64% creating jobs, 64% improving public education, growing the economy, creating a business environment that allows for innovation. lowering the federal deficit actually false down to 40. not as much confidence there as a part on the other side. we been said the training faces a number of challenges including but not limited to large budget deficits, national debt, slower economic recovery, high unemployment, deep political divide on many issues. do you believe we will overcome these challenges in the foreseeable future as we've done in the past, or do you think these are unique set of challenges that are so serious that we might not
not the federal government and me it a big and huge one and any little niche that you can knock down the deficit is good. >> okay, but john, what happens to the states. we are finding out that california is signing up for powerball because of the revenues that they get. is it bad for states. >> it is really bad for states. wayne has much chance of winning the lottery as geth throh a comment without johnathon interrupting. >> zero. >> and the problem you have with this. this could be a biion dollar jack mots and huge and going to kill the state lottos and in the stouthe states. they were sold as a way of funding education . that didn't happen. they are dependent on the general fund. cash strapped states that depend on the lotto, you will cripple the funding for the states is it a bad idea. it robs peter to pay paul. >> johnathon, you wouldn't be cutting wayne off. >> i am keeping quiet. wayne has to check his calculator. 580 million jackpot would pate zero.zero 3 percent of the national debt. we don't need a new plan to pay off theebt. we need a new philosophy and not exasbrate the debt. in a ful
, we are talking about deficit deduction. we are talking about raising revenue to a level in which can begin to support the kinds of investments we need to make to train our future work force and to create an environment in which we can care for the elderly. >> the think americans will remain optimistic but this did of the economy? if we have not tackle the things we have just talked about like the cost of education, the housing market? we are figuring out some philosophical issues about taxing and funding? >> i think the economy has been growing slowly and steadily all in the absence of any movement, which we have seen over the test of the last year. i have worked on guantanamo for the past 10 years. my sense is that if there is some movement until the positive direction, which have not seen out of washington and enter a long time, -- in a long time, at least we will not see head winds. we are making some progress. i see that continue. >> i want to come back to what todd said earlier. i am concerned about confidence being fragile. todd reference what happened until august of 2011. we
this morning. you made a comment that you did not believe anybody was interested in solving this deficit problem. that about knocked me out of my chair. i need you to explain to me and the rest of the people watching why you said that anthony g. to -- and i need you to expound on that. i will take my answer off the air. please ask mr. reid to not to be such an obstructionist and sit down and listen. have a great day. guest: imitate a few days for that message out to get through from me. there's a lot of concern about budget deficits. in the period after the downturn, budget deficits for in a range of 10% of the entire gdp, the entire economic output of the u.s. they have come down a little bit. economists think to be sustainable, budget deficits have to be in the range of 3% of economic output or a lower. the focus of this effort to reduce deficits now is on getting them, in the federal budget deficit to the range of 3% or so. that is what i mean when i say policymakers are not trying to get rid of the budget deficits. given the economic weakness, a little bit of deficit spending is pro
, and he said that it is untanble to not cut them because they are driving the budget deficit, and, you know, the whole entitlement issues, the real core of the problem, the taxing issue, yes, the pyrotechnics, and its -- there's the struggle between the republican and democratic view, but all the numbers people know that it's the entitlement issue so if there's a fix, trajectory to make it somehow stable, that would be -- that's the relation. uh-oh, you have something from the book. >> your books are all ultimately about power, how it's used, squandered, built, and so the sub text of the events that you write about is how life works, how washington works. my favorite sentence in "the price of politics" is, "when you need friends, it's too late to make them." what have you learned about washington and life from the grand bargain? what is the hundred-year lesson from how that unraveled? >> well, you mean last year? what happened last year? well, that they found a way to postpone everything, and, again, they can postpone lots of the problems, but postponement is the theme. the cliche, "ki
of the tenure period the deficit to gdp ratio would be under 1%. succumbing you would solve the deficit problem. estimate under 1%? the percentage of your debt as the deficit to the gdp. the deficit to gdp. a deficit to gdp. now, we don't want to get there that we. the same way we don't want to go over the fiscal cliff. in other words, the fiscal cliff is a big austerity. we get $7 trillion in the deficit reduction over the last ten years. but you don't do it the way we want to do it. when it comes to the baseline, we have to work together as part of an agreement to get the right baseline but that doesn't mean it is not for real world deficit reduction. it is. does it mean that it's better than the current law? maybe not. but there is an agreement that in the fiscal cliff is not the best way. >> we could add the baseline. the deficit to gdp. >> you said the deficit. >> you look at the current line baseline and get under 1% of deficit to gdp. >> seven years and 7 trillion of debt reduction. if anybody wants to read more about, please look at that space on what it takes. i thank you all for being
the kinds of revenue from the wealthiest americans to help the economy grow and achieve deficit reduction and this puts us on a path towards a better economy. >> [inaudible question] what will he do at this moment? >> i would simply redirect that question to the republican leaders, who to this day, have not put forward any proposal on how they would achieve revenues and address the issue on the top 2%. there is no other way to do it, there is no other mathematically sound way to do it. making vague promises about achieving revenue through capping deductions were closing loopholes, it simply doesn't add up to a serious proposal. we haven't heard which deductions they would cap or which loopholes they were close. what is true is that other proposals that have been put forward include attempts to raise revenue only through closing loopholes and limited deductions can only achieve this if the middle class gets stuck with the bill. or if you have a proposal that is wildly limply unfeasible because it suggests that we would wipe out charitable deductions. it is simply impossible and getting som
and screaming that can't be part of it, yet all of them privately will tell you what's driving the deficit more than any single thing of medicare and medicaid and longer-term social security, so the mere fact that we are discussing those types of things fit. in terms of the votes, look, if it's going to be a deal there has to be votes from both sides. the reality is -- and these guys, the president and the speaker dealt with one another before. they've never been able to come to a deal. they came to a huge deal during the lame-duck session in 2010 on extending the bush tax cuts. they came to another deal without shutting down the government in april of 2011 cutting discretionary spending by billions of dollars and they came to another one on the debt ceiling as well which was a 2.2 trillion dollar long-term reduction in exchange for an increase in the debt ceiling. so, you know, the need to take it to another level. this is a more complex problem, and it's the beginning of a series of negotiations between the two. they are going to be together for the next four years. the president won the elec
it in building a good, solid farm bill which actually found $23 billion in savings towards the deficit. we did it in passing a strong highway bill that will strengthen our nation's infrastructure. and we did it most recently this week in working through a large and complex defense authorization bill that will keep our nation safer and more secure in these perilous times. it will take more of this kind of cooperation and consensus building to address the very real and substantial challenges facing our nation today. that is why i'm deeply concerned about a proposal floated recently by some members of the majority regarding the rules of the senate. they propose to change the nearly 100-year-old senate rule that requires a two-thirds majority to change the operating rules of the senate. our colleagues in the majority are proposing to use a simple majority vote to make the change. that's the issue here. the issue is the manner in which they plan to do it. once the precedent of changing a rule with a simple majority vote is established, 51 senators could change the rules to suit their own convenienc
% of the deficit. we have spend ourselves into a hole and we're not going to raise taxes, borrow money and get out of it. will i accept a tax increase as part of a deal to actually solve our problems? yes. but the president is negotiating with the wrong people. he needs to be negotiating with our bond holders in china. because if we don't put a creditable plan on this, on the discussion, ultimately, we all lose. >> you got your colleague debbie stabenow, on the your screen as well, can you say quickly what it is going to take? >> well, we got to quit playing the game, george, you can't continue to lie to the american people, there is no way to fix medicare under the guidelines of aarp that our tax dollars are now advertising to say not fix it. the way we can fix it is to control the cost. the way to control the cost is to have more individual participation. there's a lot of ways to do that. you can't play the game and hide. medicare and social security and medicaid if those aren't fixed if we're not honest about how to fix them and the fact, that, yes, everybody in this country will have to partic
with the president and other ceo's to discuss the impending crisis. we even published their own study on the deficit, copies of which are available here today. we look forward to continuing this conversation, keeping the dialogue on going for the next month is critical if we're going to solve this problem -- and we think our panel will be very enlightening in terms of what the issues are. so, al, with that i will turn it over to you and the panel. we look forward to reproductive hour. thank you very much. >> can everybody hear? i welcome you all to bgov -- if you do not know as much about it as you want, i invite you to stay, because it really is a fabulous place. we do have an all-star panel. i will start with my left, which is where bob corker says i always start. tim pawlenty, former governor of minnesota. i wrote that i thought that if he could get the nomination he would have been the strongest republican presidential candidate. i was absolutely right -- we just could not figure out how to get there from here. tim is now the head of the financial services round table, a job he took just about a
us with the deficit of one. that is the deficit. sizable it is. this will be the president's fourth for which he is personally responsible, fourth deficit in excess of a trillion dollars. president obama wants to plug that trillion dollars hole by raising taxes on household incomes, as we all know that have incomes over $250,000. the top 2%. that would bring in $802 million, $82 billion. that'sbout 8% of that deficit. so does that suggt we have a tax problem or, perhaps, a spending problem? think about this taxpayers making more than $250,000 representing the top 2% paid more than 46% f all texas. that would seem like a pretty fair deal to most of us, but the president says it is not fair. we don't know what that number is. how much should it be? and contrary to what the president would have you believe as he campaigns untack sites all around the country and against the wealthy, he's doing a lot of that. the bush tax rates are not the root of our problems. in fact, individual tax payments rose, get this, $2,303,000,000,000 or 26%. over the past two ears. under those very low unshare
. not a driver of the deficit but, hey, cut that. one more specific. preserve the bush-era tax rates for income over $250,000. it's not a tax increase for everybody who earns over $250,000. it's only the income over $250,000 that would get additional taxes if the bush-era rates went away and the president's proposal was passed. but, no, they want to preserve -- totally preserve tax cuts for income over $250,000. they want to preserve the reduced capital gains rate and dividends rate which principally who ben pets, who else, millionaires and billionaires. now -- benefits, who else, millionaires and billionaires. they did have the jay wellington wimpy plan. you remember him? popeye. i will pay you for a hamburger today. unspecified tax loopholes. we will lower the tax rates for the people on the top. but they'll raise over $800 billion. the ability to deduct the interest on their home mortgage, do they want to take that away? probably. got to come from something pretty big. they don't want to touch the billionaire, millionaire job creator class. now, you know, that's a pretty interesting position
by market opinion. we'll take stock of britain's progress towards deficit reduction, this ahead of the chancellor's autumn statement. senior fellow for international economics. will the numbers live up to the expectations. meanwhile, over in ghi narks the mainland's factories are crank out more goods at the fastest pace in month. >> chinese factories appear to be recovering. the hsbc pmi, a private gauge of manufacturing, and the government's official pmi, both show a steady improvement for the industry in november. the hsbc pmi final reading came in at 50.5, the quickest expansion in over a year. the industry saw a pick up in new orders as well as stronger exports thanks in part to christmas demand. the concern is about the the unevenness of the recovery. the sub indices for employment as well as small and medium sized companies ticked downwards and that suggested to some that the recovery is mainly led by investment in state-owned enterprises. a bigger worry is about the outlook for external demand especially in the united states. people here are worried about the fiscal cliff
intervention to curb the deficit. it has been astronomical. then i heard barack obama say the way we are going to do it is by making more cuts in various ways. he was saying by making more cuts and the only people it is going to hurt is the working class and somewhat of the middle-class. he should mention the fact that out of control spending has a lot to do with the credit card crunch. specifically because of the middle-class. i think if we get those tax cuts centered with them, i do not think the poll would be affected. you have these small companies that are developing, and he is saying have those small companies hire more people and get them involved, but come consumer expenditures. that is partially i think a solution. host: you are calling on the republican line and you think hillary clinton would make a good candidate. would you vote for her in 2016? caller: i think she would be a very vital aspect to the political process. as far as her running for president, 2016 -- god knows what may happen from this point to that point. as far as her role as a democrat, i think by working along with
times." so far in fiscal year 2013, the government notching up a $172 billion deficit in november a lawn. jams is joining us from orlando, florida on the democrats' line. caller: i think the number one priority is the people, and i think he will do a good job. people should give him more credit and let him do what he is doing. it will take time. i think he has a lot on his hands to deal with now. host: if you get through, turn the volume down on the tv set. this is from "to the new york times." our question -- what should be the president's number one agenda. next up is christine from new york city on the independent line. caller: good morning. i believe the president will not be able to accomplish his agenda without doing something that i believe is supported by the majority of the american people, that is the critical need for campaign finance reform to restore us to democracy that the people are represented at intergovernment instead of special interests. if we got campaign finance reform enacted, i know john mccain wanted it and a lot of other people -- we could then move on to do wh
of payments deficit remains petroleum, and to increase our g.d.p. by the maximization of these activities in the united states rather than exporting our dollars abroad. so thank you very much and i think we can sit down now or -- yeah. >> thank you. give us a moment to take our seats. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, our panel discussion is about to begin, featuring senator lamar alexander, senator roy blunt, and our moderator, christine romans. >> can you hear me now? there we go. good morning, rn. -- all right. so i'm a lazy moderator. i've warned everyone. we want to get the ball rolling and talk about this report, talk about the future of energy in this country, and the future of transportation and america's national security with regards to energy. but i want to make sure that all of you know to please jump in. i don't want to ask a question and then ask another question. i want this to be a discussion, and i'll steer it. everyone agree? do we all agree? wonderful. let me start first with fred. nice to see you again. >> good to see you. >> you've heard the findings of the report,
the deficit we have. the truth is, if you want to balance the budget, which i do, you have to have increased revenues and you have significant spending cuts. and you have said many times on this program that raising taxes on rich people is not enough to deal with the deficit. you are right. the truth is, the best thing we could do is go over the fiscal cliff. we have the same tax rates that we have when bill clinton was president. significant cuts in defense and also significant human services can you tell us. >> katie, let me ask you, before you respond to what governor dean is saying. there is logic to what howard dean is saying. i don't happen to agree with it. but i know where he's coming from. katie, let me ask you this -- katie can't hear me. we'll wait for her to get back hooked in. howard, what about the notion that i'm posing tonight -- i've said this a few times -- republicans better be careful. they're not going down your road and the democrats aren't going down your road. you have middle class tax cuts for the democrats and it sometimes sounds to me as an old reagan conservative
the level needed to implement his proposals to cut the deficit unless taxes are raid on the wealthy. >> there is a bottom-line amount of revenue that is required in order for us to get a real, meaningful deficit reduction plan. >> obama added that if republican officials acknowledged this reality, the actual numbers proposed by each party are not that far apart. republicans have made a counteroffer. they want to raise revenue by reviewing the current tax deduke system. house speaker john boehner has urged the president to compromise. >> our members believe strongly that raising tax rates will hurt the economy. now we need a response from the white house. >> unless the two sides reach an agreement by the end of this year, the automatic tax increases and spending cuts will take effect in the new year. >>> time to get a check on the markets now. the nikkei here in tokyo rose above the key 9,500 level as concerns about the u.s. economy eased. the nikkei index right now trading at 9521, a gain of over .5% from wednesday's close. traders said positive remarks about a fiscal cliff deal by
but used that money for deficit reduction because he believed that would control the economy. president clinton did listen to him. and i'll tell you, i talked to bob rubin about that anecdote where clinton says you tell me a bunch of bond traders control the economy -- i'm paraphrasing -- and rubin said, yes, i am. i asked him about that once a couple years ago, and he said it was true. it wasn't as dramatic woodward made it out to be, but it did has happen. but you didn't get that out of geithner. you kind of don't think you'll get that out of lew. he's very much aligned intellectually with president obama particularly on the notion of fairnesses. you know, you talk to economistses. should we really be raising taxes now? no. hour hour tax increases, we're going to lose the deductions -- >> probably shouldn't be cutting that much. the economy is like in a very weird state right now, kind of like i think the notion is to grow it now, you know? and, you know, this guy doesn't see that. he sees raising taxes not as an economic efficiency so to speak, but as you know, you don't get a lot of
accomplish something. if you go back to before bush tax cuts, three quarters of the deficit is gone. it was supposed to sunset two years ago. when is a good time to let those things sunset? >> you're right, there's never a good time. >> maybe do something with the sequester, but let the tax cuts expire. >> although i have to say at this time it's too much i think in terms of the tax increase. >> we never want any pain. >> you're right. and we do need to get our fiscal house in order. but again, this is why the idea would be to come up with a longer term plan where you could scale some of these things in and you have to come up with a plan that you'll stick to, otherwise you get into this where -- >> we never stick to anything. if we get another deal that is toothless and -- >> the markets will become even more skeptical because we've seen this before. but i have to say two things. i don't necessarily buy into the deal that there's a fiscal slope. i have to say on the tax side, one of the things we keep talking about is the amt. boy, that's something that will -- >> howard goes on an
for a deficit deal, president obama pressed his case at the home of a middle class family in virginia today, part of his pitch to extend tax cuts for all but the very wealthy. good evening, i'm jeffrey brown. >> woodruff: and i'm judy woodruff. on the "newshour" tonight, we update the state of the negotiations and examine the push to make changes to social security and medicare. >> brown: then, margaret warner looks at the political strife in egypt, after deadly clashes in the streets and resignations by top officials. >> woodruff: we have a battleground dispatch from a coastal city facing rising sea levels and the next big storm. >> if sandy were to come close r directly into norfolk i think we'd all be in big trouble. >> brown: we assess the latest diplomatic moves to end syria's war, as secretary of state hillary clinton meets with russia's foreign minister. >> woodruff: and ray suarez has the story of a program that aims to put students at low-achieving schools on a path to high school graduation. >> we're here to make things better. we're here to tutor kids. we're here to make sure tha
who actually came up with a plan to cut the deficit, a plan that everyone hailed as magnificent but no one wanted to adopt. >>> joining me now is cnn contributor will cain. he leans right. good morning, will. >> good morning. let me tell you something. you said the popularity of gangnam style knows no limits. i beg to differ. >> you do? >> i think we just found its limits, when 8-year-olds start doing gangnam style you can count on its popularity decreasing. we're about a year away from it being makarena. >> trying to get two sides come together to come to a deal on the fiscal cliff. >> i don't know about young people's abilities to force cats and dogs and democrats and republicans to come together to find a deal. he had a much more profound message than just simply dancing in that clip, in that psa essentially. he was trying to alert young people to the fact that old people, bluntly, are organized. look at the army of aarp representatives that ensure that programs like medicare and social security, programs that take up something like 50% of our federal budget will remain intac
the economy. most of the deficit we have today is a symptom of how the economy is and is providing a useful product by injecting demand into the economy, and that is why we are still constrained. host: joseph and is on the democratic line. caller: while this money is turned over to the states on behalf of the employ unemployedw much of that is kept by the state's tax hos? to the states to give that money back to the federal government if it is not paid out? once you open up a claim, just because you have got to clean open, you have $4,000 in your account -- massachusetts, you might have $15,000 in your account. that money, if you do not dried out, the state keeps it, i believe. -- draw it out, the state keeps it, i believe. guest: i am not sure how that would be handled. the difference between what is happening in the state fund, which is state-funded, and the federal reimbursement, i believe the federal reimbursement only goes to the states after they pick up the money. guest: that is my understanding as well. i did nothing states are able to keep money that is not disbursed to the unemplo
balanced, responsible ways to reduce our deficit next week. we can reform our tax code next year. but we must give economic certainty to the middle class now, today. democrats agree, independents agree, and the majority of republicans agree, mr. president, and the american public agrees by a huge margin. even dozens of c.e.o.'s from major corporations whose personal taxes go up under our plan emphatically agree. the only people who aren't on board are republicans in congress. but now even they're crying out for compromise. i only hope my friend, john boehner, is listening. the presiding officer: the republican leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: yesterday afternoon came to the floor and offered president obama's proposal on the fiscal cliff to show t
progress. britain started with a large deficit, but we're getting it down. >> you've drawn criticism about the lack of supporting growth. when will we see measures that booth the long term growth of the economy. >> i think you see two sorts of measures. big structural reforms to education and welfare, but also yesterday changes to our tax regime. so we now have one of the lowest corporation tax rates of any major economy in the world. we've just cut it so that it will be 21%, much lower than our competitors. and we've also greatly increased the allowances for small and medium sized firms so they can invest and expand. so where we've been able to help businesses, we've absolutely done that, and we've had very positive reaction from the business community. >> how concerned are you about the aaa rating and the risk that we continue to drift, still need to cut more and boost growth? >> well, we've got to go on commanding the confidence of the world that we can deal with our debts. that is reflected in the very, very low interest rates that we get at the moment for gilts. and of course that's t
economy. we need to show the world we can get our economy under control, reduce the deficit, and begin to show leadership in various areas of new technology that demonstrated here to the rest of the world. kohl will always be there. there's lots of work there. all the sales will help, i think, of leverage our capability and give us more options. >> let me bring you in. 92% of american transportation is run on petroleum. with this new landscape for energy production of, how are we doing on diversifying different kinds of things that are running our transportation? >> so far, it is going slow. something that was deeply focused on was something note senator alexander said earlier. we need to find more and use less. i think you're asking about the use less part. the extension of the changing fuel efficiency standards was one thing, but we believe fervently in the need to diversify away from using petroleum for transportation and given that it represents 70% of our use of petroleum to begin with. with the change in technology and the access to so much homegrown natural gas, we can use that
split right down the metal on the political ppll on how they want obama to cut the deficit. 41 percent responded in favor of spending cuts. 41 percent of respondents saying they favor tax increases. the white house says it will offer a counterproposal to house speaker proposal. saying that unless he accepts tax increases on the rich the president is willing to go over the cliff. let's get straight to the politics of these developments and the rhetoric and possible economic impact of failure to resolve the issues. joining as, former special assistant to president george w. bush, a veteran political consultants and republican pollster. let's start, if i may, with you. do you think both sides right now are seriously ready to go over the cliff? >> i think the president is very ready because they are reading into this election last month a mandate that i simply don't see. the president got 15 million americans to vote against him which fail to produce any type of meaningful budget in his democratic controlled senate. we are at the disco club because of the president's inability to ever a si
, reduce the deficit, and begin to show leadership in various areas of new technology that demonstrated here to the rest of the world. kohl will always be there. -- coal is always going to be there. there's lots of work there. all the sales will help, i think, of leverage our capability and give us more options. >> let me bring you in. 92% of american transportation is run on petroleum. with this new landscape for energy production of, how are we doing on diversifying different kinds of things that are running our transportation? >> so far, it is going slow. something that was deeply focused on was something note senator alexander said earlier. we need to find more and use less. i think you're asking about the use less part. the extension of the changing fuel efficiency standards was one thing, but we believe fervently in the need to diversify away from using petroleum for transportation and given that it represents 70% of our use of petroleum to begin with. with the change in technology and the access to so much homegrown natural gas, we can use that and we can also use the development
for the american people that extends tax cuts to the american people. brings our long-term deficits down. tough spending savings is part of that, and invest in things that matter to the american economy, like infrastructure, and getting americans back to work. we think we can do that. we have a good chance, and it's very important. and i think we'll get there, david. >> do you think we'll get a deal by the end of the year? >> i do. because the only thing standing in the way of that is a refusal by republicans to accept that rates have to go up on the wealthiest americans. and i don't really see them doing that. >> the idea that they have signalled something significant for them, which is -- >> what is that? >> putting revenue on the table. >> it's welcome that they are recognizing that revenues are going to have to go up. but they haven't told us anything about how far rates should go up, how far revenues should go up, who should pay higher taxes. >> republicans have said that no republicans will vote for a tax rate increase. do you think they are just bluffing? >> i can't tell you what they ar
-war in washington, from one half of the team that produced the deficit-cutting plan republicans say is their inspiration, democrat erskine bowles. >> there are over $7 trillion worth of economic events that are going to hit america in the gut. i think impact would be really strong. if anybody thinks this is going to be a slope better wake up. >> ifill: the link between brain injury and sports, new evidence ties repeated blows to the head to long-term damage. we take a look. >> brown: ray suarez looks at the firestorm over israel's announcement it will expand settlements in the west bank. >> ifill: elizabeth brackett looks at how one chicago school is dealing with the transition to new state-wide standards. >> i really did find that the kids do understand more, and they learn more. they're more interested in what they're learning. >> brown: plus, as global carbon dioxide levels hit record highs, we analyze the increasing difficulty of combating climate change, with carol davenport of the "national journal." >> ifill: that's all ahead on tonight's newshour. major funding for the pbs n
of the entire group of government spending programs that are being looked at to get to deal with the deficits? >> well, before i answer that i was very interested in the way you characterized these programs as entitlements. so-called, you said, entitlements. and we think that a better term would be earned benefits. you know, i counted the letters in the word "entitlement." there are 11 letters. often people refer to entitlement as a four-letter word and it's a derogatory, derisive characterization. these are earned benefits. people pay for them while they're working, social security part "a" medicare, the hospital part. 25% of the premium for part "b." so i wish we would switch from entitlements to earned benefits, first of all. now answer your question, social security has not added a penny to the federal debt, to the deficits every year. it has a surplus. it has a surplus of $2.7 trillion. so why are we in such a rush to change a program that does not have -- is not bankrupt, has a surplus, has 22 years of solvency before it does have a serious problem and has not contributed to the federal
aggressive boj easing include prime minister noda. >> translator: construction bonds and deficit covering bonds are both debts. it could but the wrong economic policy to depends on the bonds and make the boj buy them. >> reporter: economists are also split on the issues. there's a lot the bank of japan can do. >> reporter: the boj can take a number of measures. one is to expand the balance sheet. the bank can buy more government bonds and even foreign bonds. another important step is for the boj to have a clear target for price increases. >> reporter: monetary easing alone cannot overcome deflation. >> defeating deflation is possible, unrealistic and not feasible and also destable ieid. >> what's needed to end japan's deflation and rescue japan out of its slump. >> deregulating medical industry, agriculture and maybe try to increase a number of immigrants. that'd be very important. collapse of the japanese marts that probably lead to a significant deposits. when it starts to fall out and banks cannot bjb's, interest will go up. that's how effects are huge. financial system may become real
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 142 (some duplicates have been removed)